Slashdot Mirror
On the Trail to Atlantis
Bifurcati writes "Scientists claim to have found the lost city of Atlantis, off the coast of Cyprus. They apparently have used sonar to detect the sunken landmass, and even identify geographical features. They seem confident, but all the same, I wouldn't go buying Atlantian artifacts on Ebay just yet."
So the two options are:
1) Bunch of Paleo/mesolithic[1] hunter gatherers
end up on an island just off the north african and spanish coasts, develop agriculture about 3000 years before anyone else, yet strangely forget to tell anyone about it, and indeed fail to influence any of the other tribes in the region that they may have had contacts with, as they are obviously horribly insular pigfuckers, then disappear without trace[2] but somehow manage to be known to the Egyptians some 7500 years later, so they can tell Aristotle, who can then tell Plato so he can make some nice stories about them.
or
2) Graham Hancock, is a lying wanker with all the credibility of David Icke (I, for one, welsome our Subterranean Lizard Overlords), and a Von Daniken-esque habit of changing the "evidence" to fit with his theories.
Which is more likely?[3]
[1] My specialism never was stones and Bones, it doesn't really get interesting until the Neolithic
[2] Not to mention the odd lack of populations pressure that should have forced at least some of the members of this culture to leave their island paradise and strike out on their own elsewhere (Mu perhaps, or maybe Shangri-La?)
[3] Theres a reason that Hancock is shunned by people with clue, the fact that he is a complete cunt has nothing to do with it, the fact that he is rather hard of thinking, and has problems with understanding elementary logic and the scientific method does
The fertile land encouraged agriculture which made the peoples more sedentary in nature, and thus more likely to become advanced.
I think this right here indicates the flaw in your argument.
Since Europe is he only truly advanced civilization, from which all other primitive civilizations have gained their knowledge, one should assume that Europe was a peaceful place full of sedentary people.
History proves quite the opposite. In fact, the more war and conflict that was going on in Europe, the faster the rate of technological advancement. Indeed, the sedentary people of the rest of the world seem to lazy to accomplish anything besides having sex. That's why they are chronically unable to sustain their population growth.
We have but to go to countries like India, where the people are quite sedentary. I mean, Great Britain was able to occupy the country with a mere 100,000 troops, at a time they had 300-400 million people.
Despite their sedentary nature, we find that the vast majority of Indian people are living in communities far less advanced that the average town in the Roman Empire 2000 years ago.
Then of course there is Africa, where the vast majority of people live in mud huts which are less advanced than the common beaver dam which is at least water proof and can only be entered from under water.
I don't read or respond to AC posts
My operat~1 system unders~1 long filena~1 , does yours?
Error: A filename cannot contain any of the following characters: \ / : * ? " |